The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Climate change won't be solved with a negative attitude > Comments

Climate change won't be solved with a negative attitude : Comments

By Heather Bruer, published 15/7/2011

Pricing carbon in Australia will have positive ripple effects internationally and on future generations.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. All
The science confirming the climate change as being anthropogenic is about as compelling as the science that links smoking to cancer... Lets all stop trying to be a hero, and do everything we can to live on a healthy planet, including polluting less!
Posted by JulieP, Saturday, 16 July 2011 11:24:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Just a moment ago I read a Garnaut Climate Change review by a Dr Donna Green from February 2008, Sydney Uni.
It is exceptionally well written & exceptionally ignorant as only academics can manage. If we were to believe what these people write then we might as well believe in Santa Clause. It is a typical scenario of indigenous people telling ignorant, wide-eyed academics what they want to hear & then it is written down for future brainwashing. And so the saga gets perpetuated & coloured in in the process.
Reading this review made me once & for all realise how far down the tube Australia has already gone at the hand of our academic experts. Yet there are still many out there who're pining for more such ignorance. I really have had enough of this. The next academic who comes near me with any such nonsense will cop a clip behind their green ears.
Posted by individual, Sunday, 17 July 2011 7:21:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@ individual:

Charming. Do you make a practice of giving people you disagree with a "clip behind the ears"?

I've just had a quick squizz at the offending paper, and I agree that it is well-written and clearly presented. Beyond your usual generalised spray at academics, what exactly about the report's content is it that drives you to violence?

Don't you think that the health of Indigenous people is worth considering in the context of climate change? I understand that their health stats are already pretty appalling, and it seems to me to be prudent for health service providers to be planning for the effects of AGW on their clients.

Is your problem the fact that they're apparently planning for a future under AGW, or is it because they are listening to their Indigenous clients at all? Since you don't say, it's impossible to tell. If you care to outline what specific aspects of the report so upset you, we might be able to overcome your violent reaction before you're tempted to act on it.

Have a lovely and peaceful day ;)
Posted by morganzola, Sunday, 17 July 2011 7:53:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
morganzola,
thank you for confirming my expectations of your replies.
You're way out of order with your standard opportunism kind suggesting that I am not concerned for the wellbeing of Indigenous/Australians. Were you to look at past posting & past your blind opportunism at white bashing you'd find otherwise. You're merely exposing you lack of integrity with such nonsensical rhetoric.
Have a look at the photos in that report, then go there & only then tell me what's right with that report i.e. not deceiving in favour of the hangers on academics who go on these jaunts for not helping the indigenous but only for their own interest.
Are you saying that living below high tide mark qualifies for spending even more taxpayer money ?
Btw. the sand bags on the grave weren't there before the Tv crews announced their planned visit.
Posted by individual, Sunday, 17 July 2011 10:01:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@individual:

You should try and calm down and dispense with the angry bluster, if you want people to understand the nature of your complaint.  Other than it's something to do with the photos, it's still not clear.  Did you read the words too?

Are you suggesting that the TSI people deliberately built their villages and food gardens below high water mark?  Coincidentally, on ABC News 24 this morning there was a report about salt water inundation of traditionally fresh water springs on some of the islands that have been fresh for thousands of years.  This seems consistent with AGW predictions and is surely something of major concern to those communities and those responsible for providing infrastructure, health services etc.

Why does the report make you want to commit an act of violence against an "academic"?  Are you saying that the sea level isn't rising in the Torres Strait, that their freshwater supplies aren't being contaminated with seawater, and that the researcher and her informants, not to mention the dozens of references, are all telling lies?

Lastly, I'm not suggesting anything about your concerns about Indigenous health.  Rather, I'm trying to ascertain what it is about that particular report that makes you angry to the point of violence, and what any of it has to do with Heather Bruer's article.  Do you want to bash her too?
Posted by morganzola, Sunday, 17 July 2011 10:44:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Heather,

Here is a small exercise for you. With your higher education you should be able to complete it easily.

Part A.

'Meteorology is the science of the atmosphere: weather is the condition of the atmosphere at any moment, or it's trend over a comparatively short space of time: climate is the mean condition of the atmosphere over thirty years or so.'

(Meteorology for Seamen, Commander C.R. Burgess, OBE., R.N., F.R.Met.S., Navtical Press, Brown, Son and Ferguson Ltd. Glasgow.1982)

This is the Royal Navy's definition of climate. It is underpinned by a body of observation, experience and study from over nearly 600 years.

In 5000 words evaluate the definition and discuss it's supporting body of work.

Part B.

In 500 words define modern Climate Scientists meaning of Climate, detailing the sources underpinning the definition.

Now for my rant.

Some years ago you people started to scare the crap out of everyone with the horrific Global Warming, as the evidence backing that became suspect and people started to move away from that you lot started to move as well, onto Climate Change. Now that that is being seen as a stupid furphy designed to cover your original stupid warming claims you are moving onto what I believe was always the original motive.

Clean Energy Future. Or a clean up of the atmosphere simply for the sake of cleaning up the atmosphere. Which in itself is not a bad ideal or action to undertake. It is one I've always believed we should undertake. But since you have been so deceptive with your tactics in the past it is now more unlikely to be achieved than would have been the case had you lot been straight in the first place.

You've simply peed off too many people now.

Well done.

Those of us who are straight simply wouldn't want to be associated with the deceiptfulness and deceptiveness of your tactics.

Well done again.

Make sure you thank your teachers.
Posted by imajulianutter, Sunday, 17 July 2011 10:58:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy